Look, I am a true beginner as I have never played before and am just starting to read the players manual for the first time, but I noticed they mentioned that Drows are hated by most, especally Elves and Eladrin. If they ARE a playable race already, I dont know about it yet, but if they Arent, they should. Heres why: For Evil characters, they could use the Drows bad reputation to create a fully evil character with a taste for the evil side. For good characters, those would make good challenge as players would seek to 'overcome' the reputation and prove that Drows can be as nice as a Human Cleric.

I could find many other reasons why they should be added (other than the fact that they are ultimate badasses), but I pefer reading YOUR opinion, experienced players of this game which I yearn to start playing.

Yeah, Drow have been a player race for the last 4 years, otherwise...it would be a complete waste of time the menzobarrenzan book, because it's directed to drow characters toward 4e playes, maybe you got confused by it, because you were expecting it to be the book that introduce them as a playable race for 4e or at least mention anything for them for 4e.

That book was a wasted oportunity imo with the edition neutral philosophy...or maybe because i wanted a dark pact hexblade who's pact weapon is the whip that can turn the ends into sneak head that would poison it's enemies as he/she strike with it.

The degree to which they're considered evil and hated also varies considerably from setting to setting (and in some cases, from region to region within a setting). The Forgotten Realms tends to play up the hated aspect, but in many areas of the Nentir Vale setting, an individual drow PC is more likely to be regarded as untrustworthy than hated, at least until they do something to warrant a different view, and in the Eberron setting the drow have a totally different society, nevermind relations with others.

In my campaign, Drow originally came from the Shadowfell and not the Feywild. The Drow in and from the Shadowfell are not generally considered evil although like any race they are made up of individuals and some of those are in fact evil. The Drow from the Underdark are generally considered evil by surface dwellers, though these Drow just consider themselves superior to all other races.

In my campaign, Drow originally came from the Shadowfell and not the Feywild. The Drow in and from the Shadowfell are not generally considered evil although like any race they are made up of individuals and some of those are in fact evil. The Drow from the Underdark are generally considered evil by surface dwellers, though these Drow just consider themselves superior to all other races.

Pretty close to how I do it (though I don't have an Underdark). The three Naya* races (elves, eladrin, and drow) are 'linked' to the Natural world, Feywild, and Shadowfell, respectively.

*I wanted 'elf' to refer specifically to 'ELF'-the-race, so I adopted a term to refer to those three races collectively.

In my Babylon 5 inspired island-setting, I based the elven races off of Minbari. So, the three major elven races were actually castes of the same people.

Eladrin = Religious caste.Elves = Worker caste.Drow = Warrior caste.

The only reason drow are hated or distrusted by any race is they were on the front lines of a war with humans ten years ago. Thus, humans have a post-war hatred of drow (and all elves by extension), but there isn't a universal "drow are the bad guys" issue in the setting at all.

In my campaign, Drow originally came from the Shadowfell and not the Feywild. The Drow in and from the Shadowfell are not generally considered evil although like any race they are made up of individuals and some of those are in fact evil. The Drow from the Underdark are generally considered evil by surface dwellers, though these Drow just consider themselves superior to all other races.

Pretty close to how I do it (though I don't have an Underdark). The three Naya* races (elves, eladrin, and drow) are 'linked' to the Natural world, Feywild, and Shadowfell, respectively.

*I wanted 'elf' to refer specifically to 'ELF'-the-race, so I adopted a term to refer to those three races collectively.

Well, you know, great minds and all

Personal opinion...

In my Babylon 5 inspired island-setting, I based the elven races off of Minbari. So, the three major elven races were actually castes of the same people.

Eladrin = Religious caste.Elves = Worker caste.Drow = Warrior caste.

The only reason drow are hated or distrusted by any race is they were on the front lines of a war with humans ten years ago. Thus, humans have a post-war hatred of drow (and all elves by extension), but there isn't a universal "drow are the bad guys" issue in the setting at all.

In my Babylon 5 inspired island-setting, I based the elven races off of Minbari. So, the three major elven races were actually castes of the same people.

Eladrin = Religious caste.Elves = Worker caste.Drow = Warrior caste.

The only reason drow are hated or distrusted by any race is they were on the front lines of a war with humans ten years ago. Thus, humans have a post-war hatred of drow (and all elves by extension), but there isn't a universal "drow are the bad guys" issue in the setting at all.

In my campaign, Drow originally came from the Shadowfell and not the Feywild. The Drow in and from the Shadowfell are not generally considered evil although like any race they are made up of individuals and some of those are in fact evil. The Drow from the Underdark are generally considered evil by surface dwellers, though these Drow just consider themselves superior to all other races.

Pretty close to how I do it (though I don't have an Underdark). The three Naya* races (elves, eladrin, and drow) are 'linked' to the Natural world, Feywild, and Shadowfell, respectively.

*I wanted 'elf' to refer specifically to 'ELF'-the-race, so I adopted a term to refer to those three races collectively.

Well, you know, great minds and all

Personal opinion...

In my Babylon 5 inspired island-setting, I based the elven races off of Minbari. So, the three major elven races were actually castes of the same people.

Eladrin = Religious caste.Elves = Worker caste.Drow = Warrior caste.

The only reason drow are hated or distrusted by any race is they were on the front lines of a war with humans ten years ago. Thus, humans have a post-war hatred of drow (and all elves by extension), but there isn't a universal "drow are the bad guys" issue in the setting at all.

This is an idea worthy of stealing

Not at all.

A pan of a book went "Parts of the book were original and parts were good. Unfortunately the parts that were good were not original and the parts that were original were not good." The same applies to most original ideas. They are bad. The creator may think they are great, and his players are not likely going to complain because they need somebody to run the game and they can tolerate a lot of bad fluff if it means the game gets played. But the original idea is routinely a drawback for the game. A generic drawback is that you are no longer playing in the normal D&D world, but rather in some particular world, which makes all that official material worthless. The DM must create his own, or do without. The official stuff has its flaws of course, but it is there, easily adopted and used. [& no, you rarely can do better, or you would be working for WOTC.] A complete copy of the official text is much superior on average. Now in this particular case, we have several problems. Our drow is now hated only a tiny bit more than elf or eladrin, and instead of 3 playable races, we only have one. Nothing desirable here.

In my settings, the Underdark's Drow are basically like The Old Republic's Sith Empire, replace sith lords for priestess of Lolth. The priestess of Lolth are evil and have their own agenda and will try to undermain and exploit the other priestess of lolth for more power (and other drow houses), but most of the Drow are not exactly evil, it's just how things works in the underdark afterall, it's the trope of "For my Country, Right or Wrong"

Dave, That is insultingly false on so many levels. All official (non-rules) material is worthless. Period. End of Concept. I have not, and will not ever, pay someone else to create a fictional world which I intend to use in it's entirety for home games.

The DM Created world is inherently superior to the cannonical setting because it empowers the DM to make new stories, as opposed to empowering "whoever reads more cannon fiction". I don't know how many times I've been in/run a campaign based in an official setting only to have a player say "But according to X book, Y and Z have an ABC relationship, so what you're doing makes no sense", which forces the DM to either capitulate, or depart from cannon (or come up with a plot reason for the event to occur). Settings must be created content in order for the DM to have creative control, it's an absolute necessity for all but a dedicated Gamist campaign; subjecting yourself and your players to the confines of a pre-generated campaign world is only desireable if you are a newer group needing the comfort of defined aspects or need some sort of universal consistency (and financial backing) as with the RPGA.

The reason I don't work for WotC, despite believing my self-created campaign worlds are superior is because ... the two have nothing to do with each other. Forgotten Realms having decades of fiction by professional writers and descriptive texts (including an amusing Atlas complete with an interview with Eliminster!) has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that I can run a better game by deciding the campaign specifics for myself. People who work for WotC are not automatically more creative than anyone else, I pay WotC for their system and content for the exact same reason I am paid for my job, not everyone has the time to do everything and so we pay other people to do them for us, horray business!

And you are jumping to a rather absurd conclusion about monkey's statement that Elf/Eladrin/Drow are all Mimbari. Elf/Eladrin/Drow are all Elves in D&D, they are also all separate races (with sub-races to boot!) so assuming that the different castes remain separate in the exact same way is absurd pessimism.

"Invokers are probably better round after round but Wizard dailies are devastating. Actually, devastating is too light a word. Wizard daily powers are soul crushing, encounter ending, havoc causing pieces of awesome." -AirPower25
Sear the Flesh, Purify the Soul;
Harden the Heart, and Improve the Mind;
Born of Blood, but Forged by Fire;
The MECH warrior reaches perfection.

90% of everything is crap, including all campaign worlds, official or homebrew. That's one reason I kinda like PoL - there's not much there at all, just a vague "the world is dangerous" notion, which I like. Other than that, I don't feel the need to craft a whole world as an exercise in self-gratification because most folks I play with want the game to revolve around them, not my world.

On the other hand, 4e is the first edition of D&D where I actually don't hate Drow because they're not prone to being exploited by munchkins. They're not special snowflakes and they don't get free superpowers. This tends to disappoint new players who suddenly discover Drow (DRIZZT!!!!) only to realize, wait, they don't win everything.

Also, when I DM for Drow PCs, the NPCs pretty much just treat them like everyone else. Some folks get very disappointed when they're not hated and oppressed.

OD&D, 1E and 2E challenged the player. 3E challenged the character, not the player. Now 4E takes it a step further by challenging a GROUP OF PLAYERS to work together as a TEAM. That's why I love 4E.

"Your ability to summon a horde of celestial superbeings at will is making my ... BMX skills look a bit redundant."

"People treat their lack of imagination as if it's the measure of what's silly. Which is silly." - Noon

"Challenge" is overrated. "Immersion" is usually just a more pretentious way of saying "having fun playing D&D."

"Falling down is how you grow. Staying down is how you die. It's not what happens to you, it's what you do after it happens.”

When I shared my version of drow, it was in the spirit of sharing creative ideas. Some folks may like the idea and want to use it, for others it may not be their cup of tea.

Regardless, DMs who create their own settings are indulging in a playstyle that is just as valid as using a published setting. Neither way is right or wrong. Using the published "fluff" or creating your own from scratch are both ways to enjoy the game.

..."window.parent.tinyMCE.get('post_content').onLoad.dispatch();" contenteditable="true" />The DM Created world is inherently superior to the cannonical setting because it empowers

Rather it REQUIRES. The DM is deprived of a crutch, one that he typically very much needs. Go to a fan art site and see how much is just trash, junk you would never consider paying money for. Almost all those artists think they are hot stuff despite the clear evidence to the contrary. Same thing applies to our DM. He is routinely turning out stuff that is sharply inferior to the professional work. If he wants the ego satisfaction, that is his business, but you don't want to be stealing the trash when there is serious work around.

the DM to make new stories, as opposed to empowering "whoever reads more cannon fiction". I don't know how many times I've been in/run a campaign based in an official setting only to have a player say "But according to X book, Y and Z have an ABC relationship, so what you're doing makes no sense",

Which is to say that players have an expectation about the game, and a desire that those expectations be followed. To be creating highly different stuff is denying the player what he wants out of the game. This can be the DM's right, but saying that is superior is clearly wrong.

which forces the DM to either capitulate, or depart from cannon (or come up with a plot reason for the event to occur).

which is a lot easier to do than start from nothing. "But Robin Hood steals from the rich and gives to the poor..." "My press agent really deserves a raise..."

Settings must be created content in order for the DM to have creative control,

So? Do we have any such need for such a DM-dictatorship?

it's an absolute necessity for all but a dedicated Gamist campaign; subjecting yourself and your players to the confines of a pre-generated campaign world is only desireable if you are a newer group needing the comfort of defined aspects or need some sort of universal consistency (and financial backing) as with the RPGA.

Which is the normal case, and the desired one. We are overrun by Drizzt clones because they appeal to the players. That they are so noob has no standing. We are here to supply those players with what they want, not with what we think is a neat idea.

The reason I don't work for WotC, despite believing my self-created campaign worlds are superior is because ... the two have nothing to do with each other. Forgotten Realms having decades of fiction by professional writers and descriptive texts (including an amusing Atlas complete with an interview with Eliminster!) has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that I can run a better game by deciding the campaign specifics for myself.

But what proof do we have of that? That you say you are better is nothing. We have hundreds, even thousands, who say they are the very best. We know nearly all of them are wrong, and don't rule out that they all are. By contrast, the professional has the vote of someone who put up solid money on that idea.

People who work for WotC are not automatically more creative than anyone else,

"The battle is not always to the strong, nor the race to the swift, but that's the way to bet." The phrase, "not automatically" should immediately alert us that the speaker is taking the minority position. He will be right in some tiny percentage of the cases, but wrong in the great majority.

And you are jumping to a rather absurd conclusion about monkey's statement that Elf/Eladrin/Drow are all Mimbari. Elf/Eladrin/Drow are all Elves in D&D, they are also all separate races (with sub-races to boot!) so assuming that the different castes remain separate in the exact same way is absurd pessimism.

Monkey made them all parts of the same society, instead of different societies. This sharply limits the number of possible relationships, and not in a way that is good for the game. In general, the picture of what is a drow or elf just has to be thrown out. Indeed, one wonders why the use of "drow" or "elf" even happened.

For my campaign, the loss of distinction between elven cultures worked because my players enjoyed it. Whether it would work for any other group is irrelevant. Again, I never said that my example is the only way it should be. The point of sharing ideas is to provide examples and perhaps even inspiration. If someone likes it, cool. If not, also cool.

People who work for WotC are not automatically more creative than anyone else,

"The battle is not always to the strong, nor the race to the swift, but that's the way to bet." The phrase, "not automatically" should immediately alert us that the speaker is taking the minority position. He will be right in some tiny percentage of the cases, but wrong in the great majority.

Attacking how I argue instead of the argument is a sure sign of being unable to do so. That's just smarmy, and outside of my utter boredom at the moment, I wouldn't even dain to reply to such a remark.

I can't very well say that most people who work for WotC are not very creative because I don't know them personally. I do know that RA Salvatore books are better written than what little fiction comes with the published adventures, and that he is not highly regarded amongst fantasy authors both in terms of creativity and writing ability. I do know that rather that create new content, WotC has repeatedly reissued old content. I know that the magazine content is significantly contributed by 3rd party 'freelance' writers, and that I am one of them. Are WotC employees more creative than the average person? Neither of us could say for sure, but I can tell you that they'll be closer to the middle than the top, because those at the top are capable of self-employment, and would prefer to do so rather than deal with the authoritarian guidelines required to work for The Company. Because that's what it really comes down to, regardless of the creativity of any given employee, it takes a back seat to the overall vision of the corporate ladder. It's August, I want to write about modrons- Nope, I have to put out something about Drow, that's not creativity at work.

Being a professional is in no way relevant to the quality of your work.

(Any situations or opinions expressed herein are not based on actual persons, places, or events)

And you are jumping to a rather absurd conclusion about monkey's statement that Elf/Eladrin/Drow are all Mimbari. Elf/Eladrin/Drow are all Elves in D&D, they are also all separate races (with sub-races to boot!) so assuming that the different castes remain separate in the exact same way is absurd pessimism.

Monkey made them all parts of the same society, instead of different societies. This sharply limits the number of possible relationships, and not in a way that is good for the game. In general, the picture of what is a drow or elf just has to be thrown out. Indeed, one wonders why the use of "drow" or "elf" even happened.

Then you know little of B5. An intergalactic empire (if I may call it that) is going to have far more distinct societies, political intricacies, sects, etc. than could ever develop on a single planet. It's also a return to the more correct way of thinking of having a single race with a variety of characteristics (Tough/Wise elves don't exist, right?)

I don't even feel like responding the rest of it, since I feel Salla is correct.

"Invokers are probably better round after round but Wizard dailies are devastating. Actually, devastating is too light a word. Wizard daily powers are soul crushing, encounter ending, havoc causing pieces of awesome." -AirPower25
Sear the Flesh, Purify the Soul;
Harden the Heart, and Improve the Mind;
Born of Blood, but Forged by Fire;
The MECH warrior reaches perfection.

You do a great job crazy_monkey. You have always been very patient and fair from what I've seen. I'm paid to be creative in real life, but it doesn't translate to D&D as well as I would like most of the time. But, my take is if you're having fun and those around you are having fun, then that's all that matters.

My job with Wizards of the Coast is all about communicating with the community and making sure the creative team gets your feedback.

So, while I consider myself creative (or, at least, I pretend to be creative on a regular basis), I'm not paid to be creative. ;)

If you and your players are enjoying the flavor/fluff, that's the only thing you need, you don't need anybody else to think it's good or to enjoy it.

I am sure alot of people would call BS on my settings and the flavor of my campaing, with time travel, lovecraftian abominations, and feywild that replace your mind with one of animals such as dogs and cows, and curses that force you to talk always in a question otherwise it make your head explode.

As with the elves = B5 Minbari example, I generally mine other sources for ideas and reflavor them a lot or a little depending on what I need them for. I borrow from TV, movies, books, and other games frequently.

People who work for WotC are not automatically more creative than anyone else,

"The battle is not always to the strong, nor the race to the swift, but that's the way to bet." The phrase, "not automatically" should immediately alert us that the speaker is taking the minority position. He will be right in some tiny percentage of the cases, but wrong in the great majority.

Attacking how I argue instead of the argument is a sure sign of being unable to do so.

Attacking how one argues is a standard part of any argument. One is supposed to identify fallacies and other defects [and deceptions] in an opposing argument [or in one's own for that matter]. And the presence of the previous sentence, a different argument, makes the use of "instead" distinctly suspect.

That's just smarmy, and outside of my utter boredom at the moment, I wouldn't even dain to reply to such a remark.

This seems to be the sort of remark you are trying to complain about.

I can't very well say that most people who work for WotC are not very creative because I don't know them personally.

And you would likely not know [or know] even if you did know them personally. It is their work we wish to judge, not things like social skills. Joe can be a social dud unable to speak a coherent sentence and still can churn out excellent work. Now we should note here that we are not interested in creativity. [We started the conversation talking about stealing ideas, about the precise opposite of creative.] We want settings that thrill and interest the player, and if those are complete clones with zero originality, that is fine. If it is original and bad, it is simply bad.

I do know that rather that create new content, WotC has repeatedly reissued old content.

Which in many cases is highly praiseworthy. The spellplague was quite creative, and widely comdemned for just that reason.

Are WotC employees more creative than the average person? Neither of us could say for sure, but I can tell you that they'll be closer to the middle than the top, because those at the top are capable of self-employment,

This depends in part on the definition of "top" and "middle" used. The top, defined as those capable of self-employment, is the 99th percentile, and not all of it. Our middle then extends up to 98th percentile and we are pretty safe in thinking WOTC hires from the 90s, not the 50'. They simply have the choice.

regardless of the creativity of any given employee, it takes a back seat to the overall vision of the corporate ladder. It's August, I want to write about modrons- Nope, I have to put out something about Drow, that's not creativity at work.

Which is why I said crativity is not a major value here. You may want to write about modrons while the company wants you to write about drow. Now which do you think the player wants to read about? And we are trying to please the player, not the writer. You do not want to creat a really original setting and have the players never come back. Much better some dull clone with zero originality and great player acceptance.

Being a professional is in no way relevant to the quality of your work.

Rather obvious nonsense. There will be the exceptions to the rule of course, but routinely our professional has been rated superior by large numbers of people with serious interest in getting the answer right. That a coin flip would have worked as well just won't pass muster.

And you are jumping to a rather absurd conclusion about monkey's statement that Elf/Eladrin/Drow are all Mimbari. Elf/Eladrin/Drow are all Elves in D&D, they are also all separate races (with sub-races to boot!) so assuming that the different castes remain separate in the exact same way is absurd pessimism.

Monkey made them all parts of the same society, instead of different societies. This sharply limits the number of possible relationships, and not in a way that is good for the game. In general, the picture of what is a drow or elf just has to be thrown out. Indeed, one wonders why the use of "drow" or "elf" even happened.

Then you know little of B5.

And I have no interest in learning either. It is SF, not fantasy, and while the two are not completely different, they are different, and transfering from one to another has flaws.

An intergalactic empire (if I may call it that) is going to have far more distinct societies, political intricacies, sects, etc. than could ever develop on a single planet.

Which is saying it is inferior for fantasy. [More precisely, it really doesn't make a difference. A planet is way larger than the needed size. The party will be unlikely to experience a hundred cultures and the planet will have thousands. Having millions is a waste. [Actually it is possible for our intergalactic empire to suffer from a shortage of cultures. We have objections to the "McDonald culture" as it is and it is quite possible to think of an intergalactic empire that had less cultural diversity than any of the planets would have had before the steam engine.]

It's also a return to the more correct way of thinking of having a single race with a variety of characteristics (Tough/Wise elves don't exist, right?)

That is the more incorrect way of thinking. Making all races so similar is unreal and boring for the player. [From the reality view, highly similar races can't share the same environment. One or the other vanishes. From the game view, the player does not have a dwarf or elf unless he can tell the difference between them

I don't even feel like responding the rest of it, since I feel Salla is correct.

Now this seems to violate your original statement, again. But if you think so, why write at all?

D&D is a form of recreation, a hobby. There's no wrong way to do it. I make up my own campaign world, and have for pretty close to 40 years now. People have fun playing in it. That works for me. Is it some sort of wonderful work of art, hell no. It is just a fun pastime and for whatever reason it makes me happy to play that way. My friend runs his campaign using Greyhawk, and my other friend uses Ptolus, and etc. Sometimes we all make up our own stuff, and sometimes we use some WotC or old TSR or Paizo or whatever stuff. Who cares as long as you're having fun?

PERSONALLY I like the drow as 'dark elves', but in my campaign they've been basically forgotten. They're an ancient legend, stories told around camp fires in the dark of night about ancient heroes and villains dead so long even their tombs are lost. A PC drow would be quite shocking, but most people probably wouldn't even know what she was. OTOH certain Eldar lore masters would be quite disturbed by such an appearance...

In most of my games, a drow would mainly be judged on their personal behavior - a drow walking around openly, being well-behaved and clearly demonstrating tendencies to be a hero or at least a well-meaning individual will generally be tolerated if not necessarily accepted. Certainly a drow clearly displaying some mark of service to a Good or Unaligned deity (a paladin, invoker or cleric, probably not so much an avenger) would be more often the subject of confused stares and shaking heads rather than thrown fruit, insults or knives. On the other hand, a drow going out of their way to disguise themselves or behaving in a suspicious manner will definitely be met with suspicion and predjudice. A drow character taking visible pride in their outsider status/bad reputation (a blackguard, for example), throwing it back in the faces of those he meets, or using that status to intimidate people (and otherwise publicly behaving badly) will probably be seen as being at fault for any scuffles or disputes they may be involved in (or had no involvement in but just happened to be near), may well be pointedly asked to leave town or might not get more than a token investigation into any minor "accidents" that may befall them.

Of course, there have been one or two times over the years when the campaign backstory has dictated that relations between drow and the local surface races were actually peaceful if not perfectly cordial. There have also been times when the default fluff of the drow didn't fit the circumstances of the world I was attempting to portray so I completely rewrote it much like Monkey did.

I like that you added the "Naya" term Salla. While it never came up with my players I made one of those world-building-changes-nothing ideas that the common tongue calling High Elves Eladrin was a misunderstanding of the Elven word for "People of the Spirits." Ela'drowdrin were people of the shadow spirits, Ela'voodrin were people of the primal spirits, and Ela'hidrin were people of the fey spirits. Sometimes Eladrin would shorten that to Drow, Vood, and Hi, and corupted it to Drow, Wood, and High Elves.

I liked the idea, and then none of my players chose Elf characters, and it seemed unnecessary to trudge my players through this obscure lore.